Cargando…
A comparison of curated gene sets versus transcriptomics-derived gene signatures for detecting pathway activation in immune cells
BACKGROUND: Despite the significant contribution of transcriptomics to the fields of biological and biomedical research, interpreting long lists of significantly differentially expressed genes remains a challenging step in the analysis process. Gene set enrichment analysis is a standard approach for...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6986093/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31992182 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12859-020-3366-4 |
_version_ | 1783491914427793408 |
---|---|
author | Liu, Bin Lindner, Patrick Jirmo, Adan Chari Maus, Ulrich Illig, Thomas DeLuca, David S. |
author_facet | Liu, Bin Lindner, Patrick Jirmo, Adan Chari Maus, Ulrich Illig, Thomas DeLuca, David S. |
author_sort | Liu, Bin |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Despite the significant contribution of transcriptomics to the fields of biological and biomedical research, interpreting long lists of significantly differentially expressed genes remains a challenging step in the analysis process. Gene set enrichment analysis is a standard approach for summarizing differentially expressed genes into pathways or other gene groupings. Here, we explore an alternative approach to utilizing gene sets from curated databases. We examine the method of deriving custom gene sets which may be relevant to a given experiment using reference data sets from previous transcriptomics studies. We call these data-derived gene sets, “gene signatures” for the biological process tested in the previous study. We focus on the feasibility of this approach in analyzing immune-related processes, which are complicated in their nature but play an important role in the medical research. RESULTS: We evaluate several statistical approaches to detecting the activity of a gene signature in a target data set. We compare the performance of the data-derived gene signature approach with comparable GO term gene sets across all of the statistical tests. A total of 61 differential expression comparisons generated from 26 transcriptome experiments were included in the analysis. These experiments covered eight immunological processes in eight types of leukocytes. The data-derived signatures were used to detect the presence of immunological processes in the test data with modest accuracy (AUC = 0.67). The performance for GO and literature based gene sets was worse (AUC = 0.59). Both approaches were plagued by poor specificity. CONCLUSIONS: When investigators seek to test specific hypotheses, the data-derived signature approach can perform as well, if not better than standard gene-set based approaches for immunological signatures. Furthermore, the data-derived signatures can be generated in the cases that well-defined gene sets are lacking from pathway databases and also offer the opportunity for defining signatures in a cell-type specific manner. However, neither the data-derived signatures nor standard gene-sets can be demonstrated to reliably provide negative predictions for negative cases. We conclude that the data-derived signature approach is a useful and sometimes necessary tool, but analysts should be weary of false positives. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6986093 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69860932020-01-30 A comparison of curated gene sets versus transcriptomics-derived gene signatures for detecting pathway activation in immune cells Liu, Bin Lindner, Patrick Jirmo, Adan Chari Maus, Ulrich Illig, Thomas DeLuca, David S. BMC Bioinformatics Methodology Article BACKGROUND: Despite the significant contribution of transcriptomics to the fields of biological and biomedical research, interpreting long lists of significantly differentially expressed genes remains a challenging step in the analysis process. Gene set enrichment analysis is a standard approach for summarizing differentially expressed genes into pathways or other gene groupings. Here, we explore an alternative approach to utilizing gene sets from curated databases. We examine the method of deriving custom gene sets which may be relevant to a given experiment using reference data sets from previous transcriptomics studies. We call these data-derived gene sets, “gene signatures” for the biological process tested in the previous study. We focus on the feasibility of this approach in analyzing immune-related processes, which are complicated in their nature but play an important role in the medical research. RESULTS: We evaluate several statistical approaches to detecting the activity of a gene signature in a target data set. We compare the performance of the data-derived gene signature approach with comparable GO term gene sets across all of the statistical tests. A total of 61 differential expression comparisons generated from 26 transcriptome experiments were included in the analysis. These experiments covered eight immunological processes in eight types of leukocytes. The data-derived signatures were used to detect the presence of immunological processes in the test data with modest accuracy (AUC = 0.67). The performance for GO and literature based gene sets was worse (AUC = 0.59). Both approaches were plagued by poor specificity. CONCLUSIONS: When investigators seek to test specific hypotheses, the data-derived signature approach can perform as well, if not better than standard gene-set based approaches for immunological signatures. Furthermore, the data-derived signatures can be generated in the cases that well-defined gene sets are lacking from pathway databases and also offer the opportunity for defining signatures in a cell-type specific manner. However, neither the data-derived signatures nor standard gene-sets can be demonstrated to reliably provide negative predictions for negative cases. We conclude that the data-derived signature approach is a useful and sometimes necessary tool, but analysts should be weary of false positives. BioMed Central 2020-01-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6986093/ /pubmed/31992182 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12859-020-3366-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Methodology Article Liu, Bin Lindner, Patrick Jirmo, Adan Chari Maus, Ulrich Illig, Thomas DeLuca, David S. A comparison of curated gene sets versus transcriptomics-derived gene signatures for detecting pathway activation in immune cells |
title | A comparison of curated gene sets versus transcriptomics-derived gene signatures for detecting pathway activation in immune cells |
title_full | A comparison of curated gene sets versus transcriptomics-derived gene signatures for detecting pathway activation in immune cells |
title_fullStr | A comparison of curated gene sets versus transcriptomics-derived gene signatures for detecting pathway activation in immune cells |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of curated gene sets versus transcriptomics-derived gene signatures for detecting pathway activation in immune cells |
title_short | A comparison of curated gene sets versus transcriptomics-derived gene signatures for detecting pathway activation in immune cells |
title_sort | comparison of curated gene sets versus transcriptomics-derived gene signatures for detecting pathway activation in immune cells |
topic | Methodology Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6986093/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31992182 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12859-020-3366-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liubin acomparisonofcuratedgenesetsversustranscriptomicsderivedgenesignaturesfordetectingpathwayactivationinimmunecells AT lindnerpatrick acomparisonofcuratedgenesetsversustranscriptomicsderivedgenesignaturesfordetectingpathwayactivationinimmunecells AT jirmoadanchari acomparisonofcuratedgenesetsversustranscriptomicsderivedgenesignaturesfordetectingpathwayactivationinimmunecells AT mausulrich acomparisonofcuratedgenesetsversustranscriptomicsderivedgenesignaturesfordetectingpathwayactivationinimmunecells AT illigthomas acomparisonofcuratedgenesetsversustranscriptomicsderivedgenesignaturesfordetectingpathwayactivationinimmunecells AT delucadavids acomparisonofcuratedgenesetsversustranscriptomicsderivedgenesignaturesfordetectingpathwayactivationinimmunecells AT liubin comparisonofcuratedgenesetsversustranscriptomicsderivedgenesignaturesfordetectingpathwayactivationinimmunecells AT lindnerpatrick comparisonofcuratedgenesetsversustranscriptomicsderivedgenesignaturesfordetectingpathwayactivationinimmunecells AT jirmoadanchari comparisonofcuratedgenesetsversustranscriptomicsderivedgenesignaturesfordetectingpathwayactivationinimmunecells AT mausulrich comparisonofcuratedgenesetsversustranscriptomicsderivedgenesignaturesfordetectingpathwayactivationinimmunecells AT illigthomas comparisonofcuratedgenesetsversustranscriptomicsderivedgenesignaturesfordetectingpathwayactivationinimmunecells AT delucadavids comparisonofcuratedgenesetsversustranscriptomicsderivedgenesignaturesfordetectingpathwayactivationinimmunecells |